The Other Side Of The Kingsland Estate Court Matter Part IX

Submitted by BWWR

In its latest, Keltruth starts: “I was ribbed for omitting to mention two scandals in a recent post, PwC has other problems besides Nelson’s Canadian $500 million law suit!” The thrust of Keltruth’s article is to complain about shell companies in Barbados. So, let us examine this carefully.

Our example will be an Ontario corporation called – guess what – Nelson Barbados Group Ltd. The self-same Nelson that is the plaintiff in the $500 million law suit that exercises the mind of Keltruth almost exclusively. If you go online and use you can look up Nelson for yourselves. And guess what you will get……a notice that says: “No Listing for “Nelson Barbados Group Ltd.” were found in “Orillia”. Try expanding your search location”. Now, we know that Nelson’s address is the same as that of the law firm of the Goat (K. William McKenzie) Nelson’s counsel, so the address entered is correct, according to the Ontario corporate records. Yet it is not listed for a telephone. Yet, Keltruth complains of this same thing in relation to Barbados companies.

Next up, let us do a white pages search – same site – for Donald Best (or D. Best) in Orillia. Mr. Best is registered as Nelson’s sole director. Predictably, there are no listings for any D. Best in Orillia and some 120 listings for D. Best/Donald Best in Ontario.

Please see link detailing cost paid by Nelson Barbados Group Limited

When I was a young woman, many years ago, and I wanted to get in touch with Kingsland Estates Limited or any of the other sugar companies, I would not have found them in the telephone directory. I needed to know the name of the plantation or the name of the manager of the plantation I wanted to reach and that is what would be listed. The Knox family, all of them raised, financed, educated, housed and supported by Kingsland Estates, of which Madge was a “directing mind”, know this.

These days, now I am an antique (or just old, depending on your perspective) many companies operating in Barbados do the same as Nelson has done in Canada. Their registered office is that of the office of their attorneys-at-law or accountants. Exactly the same pertains in any major off-shore investment country. There is no obligation for any company to have a telephone number as long as there is an address listed for them at Corporate Affairs to which mail can be sent. This, Mrs Accountant Kathy Davis, is called a “Registered Office”. There is no obligation for any company to submit it and its officers to a Keltruth and BFP witch hunt by listing a telephone number at which it can be reached. If Keltruth and BFP want to question any of what they stigmatize, with no grounds whatsoever, as “shell companies” then they can write them a letter. Of course, they would then have to provide a return address and give their real names.

A shell company is precisely that. Wikipedia provides that, “A shell corporation is defined in Barron’s Finance & Investment Handbook as “a company that is incorporated, but has no significant assets or operations.” As there is no obligation for companies registered with Corporate Affairs Barbados or its Canadian counterpart in Ontario to list their assets, how the hell does Keltruth determine, other than through the now famous psychic abilities of Jane Goddard née Knox that these companies are shell companies. More to the point, is there any evidence to show that Nelson Barbados Group Limited is NOT a shell company? The “proof of the pudding” will be whether Nelson has assets that can be charged if it fails to pay its legal costs next week. I can’t wait to see what will happens there and if the Goat, like Alair Shepherd, will be the ONLY counsel whose costs are paid by the losers in the Kingsland saga.

Bottom line: Keltruth complains of people hiding behind the very corporate veils behind which Madge Knox/Allard/Goat are hiding and, of course, takes the view that while it is quite in order to do that in Ontario (specially if you happen to be them) somehow doing it in Barbados is wrong. Interesting theory. Will it survive?

Just prior to my departure, Brutus asked if I could find certain judgments in the Kingsland Estates matter. My source has come up trumps and I am able to post both the original judgment of Greenidge J. in High Court Action No. 1805 of 1998 and that delivered by Chase A.J. in the Appeal. I am very interested, Brutus and Pat, to get your “take” on them.

Some while ago, Keltruth complained, supported by its toady and alleged fellow-Allard-supported blog, BFP, that certain corporate files were missing from the Corporate Registry and inferred that these had been stolen. Myself and others with intimate knowledge of the office in question, took up the defence on BU of the Corporate Registry, staffed by decent, overworked Bajans who, with the best will and intentions in the world, sometimes misplace some of the masses of files in their care. We explained that in our experience these files do always turn up. It seems that this is what has happened and Keltruth has reported it. However, has Keltruth also had the honesty or integrity or class to apologize to the staff of the Corporate Registry for suggesting unambiguously that they were delinquent in their duty of care and professional standards? Hell no. But there again as my dear late mother used to say, “You can’t expect a silken purse out of Madge Knox’s ear.”

Finally, Keltruth, as usual, right at the top of its diatribe, gets it wrong. Nelson’s suit is expressed in US dollars, not Canadian dollars as Keltruth has said. And please, Keltruth, do not impugn the sovereignty of Canada and of the United States as you have repeatedly tried to do that of Barbados by telling us it is the same thing.

Related Links

Tags: , , , ,

115 Comments on “The Other Side Of The Kingsland Estate Court Matter Part IX”

  1. Pat August 29, 2008 at 12:16 AM #


    Boys you guys have me laughing real hard.

    @ GP

    I have read most if not all of MME discussions on this site. I have also read John Knox’s affidavits, I take my hat off to MME. A Barbados Scholar only tells me that the person did well on the A levels and general paper. After two years I should hope everyone did well, but there were only a few scholarships to go around. I am sure John Knox never had to go home and bring in the sheep, feed the pigs, sweep the yard and study by kerosene oil lamp! All he had to do was go home, eat, study and sleep! What is it that the old people say… something about book learning?


    Mr. Bush, I do not put down Mrs. Knox for trying to get her hands on the rest of the shares. I, to tell you the truth, would have done the same thing. But I would have done lots of sweet talking to those old relatives of mine. I would have offered the same as Classic (even if I had to sell the children). Failing that I would work on the weakest link, Iain Deane who had refused to sell at first. Once I had him on board, then as a team I would have launched a full assault on the others before Classic even got an agreement drafted. I am assuming that all the family were on “terms”.

    But have a heart man, the lady lost every case she brought. Even to the Privy Council. Why then prolong the agony and stress. There has to be a time when we all cut our losses, no? There has to be a time when we decide that litigation should not take over our lives. Only the lawyers win. Ask you friends. They love it.

    I hope you dont have you eyes on the acre we have up in Hillswick Village. lol


  2. BWWR August 29, 2008 at 2:38 AM #

    MME, Wikipedia is a wonderful thing. However, I had not consulted it and was pleased to see that some of its words were similar. I stand by what I said about the quote being inappropriate, even if YOU got it from Wikipedia.

    BT, I am not a PR person for anyone and I am glad that you find my notion of patriotism amusing. That amusement is how countries and entire peoples are taken over. My contribution is to warn so that it does not happen here. I consider Madge and Allard no better than Sidney Burnett Alleyne, but I daresay there are some Bajans who may find him admirable and amusing. I don’t.

    Pat, right on the money as always. It is as you say “John Knox never had to go home and bring in the sheep, feed the pigs, sweep the yard and study by kerosene oil lamp! All he had to do was go home, eat, study and sleep! ” Do you know, to this very day, that is what he does?

    Finally, I was able to get sight of the court documents in Ian’s case. That was a real sweet case. Beautiful. What the Americans call a “no-brainer”. He had Kingsland and its directors by the *****. Now I know why $6 million that Keltruth says he was paid. So why didn’t Monetary Madge take his side? That is where her best interests lay. Instead, Keltruth seems to have a real deep and scornful hatred for this man – they seem to feel he betrayed them somehow. I would like to know, just cause I am a gypsy old woman, how Keltruth thinks Ian betrayed them.

    Anyway, that all has nothing to do with Nelson and, as I suspected, Ian’s action was abandoned in 2005, so it seems that I was right and it was an out-of-court settlement.


  3. Bush tea August 29, 2008 at 6:06 AM #

    Cud dear BWWR,

    …yuh gwine kill the Bush? now you comparing Madge to Sydney Burnett Alleyne?

    What SBA what?!?

    You gwine mek me hurt something with this lotta laffing hear?


  4. Micro Mock Engineer August 29, 2008 at 7:31 AM #


    You are full of delightful contradictions… an incongruous juxtaposition of Caliban and Ariel. Were ‘she’ to possess this quality, BWWR’s PR campaign might be far more successful. 🙂


  5. BWWR August 29, 2008 at 9:04 AM #


    I agree with you about Pat. She delightful. She always was. Full stop. The rest of it is patronizing. Are you implying that she is two-faced?

    As for the success or lack of success of what you choose to call my “campaign”, well, I never really looked at it as being as anything as grandiose as a “campaign”. That isn’t me. I just have a strong aversion to being lied to and misled, particulary by people whose position is advserse to mine as a Bajan. I fully recognize that I am a flawed human being who makes my fair share of mistakes – and I own up to that and to them whenever anyone produces hard evidence to prove me wrong. So, Keltruth, once again, please produce your evidence.


  6. no name August 29, 2008 at 9:21 AM #


    You might be taken seriously if you left out the repeated attempts to assinate peoples’ characters and stuck to what you know is the truth.

    The $1 million stunt you tried to pull was the last straw for me. The $1 million turned out to be a $22 million Government debt to Kingsland.


  7. Pat August 29, 2008 at 7:34 PM #

    @ MME

    hahaha, Pisces!


    So you agree with me that Mrs. Knox should have worked with Iain Deane then?

    I still cant understand why the Barbados Scholar did not offer his Mom some advice, first class honours and top of the class too! Cheese on bread, why did he not offer her some money to help buy dem dere shares? Come to think of it, why did the children Kathy and John not pool their resources to help her?


  8. BWWR August 30, 2008 at 4:22 AM #

    What stunt, no name? The ball is in your court. Re-read and stop misrepresenting. In any case, there is no evidence or timelines on your $22 million AND you said that it was money OWED by Government to Kingsland. John Knox’s P is just that. Go back over it and stop wasting people’s time.

    Pat, this “Barbados Scholar” still lives rent-free with Mummy. One would have thought that someone of his supposed calibre would have been able to hep Mummy out as you suggest. However, the apple don’t fall far from the tree and he is a worthy son of his parents – both of them layabouts.


  9. BWWR August 30, 2008 at 5:27 AM #


    Should Madge have worked with Ian? From her point of view, yes most certainly. From Ian’s, no. Ian’s action against Kingsland was one of oppression and he had no need of Madge – she would have been a liability in a way and he had an insurmountable case. He complained of a period from 1982 to the time of filing in 1997 – 15 years. For 10 of those years, Madge was a director of Kingsland or one of his alleged oppressors. In other words, he might have wanted at some stage to join her as a defendant in his action. Indeed, I saw from the Privy Council record that he did state his intention of joining her with the other defendants. Had I been counselling him, I would have advised that he NOT work with her. Had I been counselling HER, I would have advised that she move Heaven and Earth to get him to work with her.

    I saw, but I speak under correction as the old memory isn’t what it was, that Ian HAD at one time an association with Madge. I also see, however, that Madge appears to have gone behind his back and held secret meetings to negotiate with Cox and also, without Cox or Ian knowing, with Allard. Playing both sides – sneaky and typical of her. I see she did not include Ian in either negotiation, but then tried to rope him in to help Allard, but he didn’t like the terms of what Allard was offering and there is no record to say whether or not he was subsequently included by Madge in her negotiations with Allard – I think we have to assume that he was NOT, otherwise he would have recorded it in his affidavits. I also recall that his own negotiations with Cox were carried on with Madge’s full knowledge and it is noted that she was invited to attend these along with her counsel, but declined.

    At some stage, in August 1998, Ian decided to go his own way as clearly he and Madge had different agendas. He reached an agreement with Classic and advised all the Kingsland shareholders through Kingsland’s secretary, so it was up-front. Madge’s own pleadings reveal that, upon receipt of the letter from Ian to Kingsland, she advanced a claim of pre-emptive rights to purchase the estate’s shares at a mere $3.60 per share, as opposed to the $52.50 per share then on the table for the estate’s shares from Classic. It is also revealed that when this right of preemption was denied (and that denial confirmed later by the Privy Council) by Ian, she then wrote to him offering some $30 per share and INTIMATING that she would address the matter of his lawsuit later, by which time, Ian was already contracted to Classic, so, a always, Madge had missed the boat through arrogance and beligerence.

    The way I read it is that a part of the agreement with Classic would be for the withdrawal of his lawsuit and discharge of the injunction against Kingsland. It was this latter that provoked Madge to sue everybody in 1998, rather than having the good sense to either also sell, or to work with Cox.

    In Madge’s affidavits (and those of the great Prof. Knox) in response, I recall that Ian’s allegations were unchallenged.

    I am writing from memory on this and if anyone can contradict me with documentary proof, please feel free. But, ‘no name’ please address FACTS and document them.


  10. no name August 30, 2008 at 8:12 AM #


    Your comments are too personal. Only takes away from the discussion, makes you lose credibility and shows that you are not who you try to make us believe you are.

    Again I suggest you leave out the personal attacks on peoples’ characters and stick to the facts and the truth.

    i.e. Please “address FACTS and document them” if you want to be taken seriously.


  11. Anonymous August 30, 2008 at 8:14 AM #

    Iain Deane never owned neither share in Kingsland.

    You musee really tink the old lady and she children foolish?


  12. Anon 3 August 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM #

    BWWR, there are a few contributors to this discussion whose hectoring and comments you would do well to ignore as they contribute nothing. I have read with great interest what you have to say and, although I do have unanswered questions, they are a lot less than before you started to provide us with documents. I do not always completely agree with the conclusions and inferences that you draw, but I certainly think your points are well made, meritorious and well supported. Thank you and please continue.


  13. Pat August 30, 2008 at 8:22 PM #


    Iain Deane inherited his father’s shares.

    @ BWWR

    It seems to me, that Mrs. Knox really did dig herself a hole. Poor woman. Cant understand her reasoning. If she was not smart enough (I read where she went to keep house for her brother at 17) to see the benefits of having Iain on side, surely her tax payer educated son could have? She missed a capital opportunity by not purchasing his shares.


  14. BWWR August 31, 2008 at 4:25 AM #

    For the record, Pat, Ian is Vere’s son and Vere is still alive – he has to be 90 or 91 now, so Mental Madge is a spring chicken by comparison – me too.

    Ian inherited Colin’s shares. Colin was Ian’s uncle. However, from all the court pleadings, it is shown that Ian never tranferred the shares to himself, but that they stayed as the property of Colin’s estate of which Ian is sole executor. So while our friend Anonymous is correct as to ownership per se in that Ian never owned shares in Kingsland, as you and I know, Pat, he would have been registered as the holder of the shares by Kingsland on the basis of his executorship. Therefore, as executor and beneficiary of the shares, they were in his sole and absolute control and, except for their not being vested in him personally, he did effectively own them.

    And you are right. If Madge had been using her brains (what few she has) instead of sitting on them she would have done everything she could to get Ian to give her control of his shares and lawsuit. Then, Classic would have had a problem.

    Naturally, Anonymous knows this and, rather than admit it all, seeks to confuse and misrepresent yet again by omitting the salient part of the information he/she posts. But I think we all see through Anonymous by now.

    Madge did sue Ian and Colin’s estate at one point in a frivilous and vexation suit claiming rights from Colin’s estate to which she was not entitled and on which, in any case, the complaint was statute-barred (by almost 20 years). I can try (no promises) to get what I can on this case, but would rather not as, apart from false and perjurous sworn satements from John Knox, this case is not relevant to the larger issue of Nelson Barbados suing you and me as citizens of Barbados.

    The result? I am indebted to Ian’s pleading in the Ontario action for this. Goodridge J. dismissed Madge’ action with costs. Madge served notice that she would appeal. Ian asked for and obtained from the court an order for security for his costs payable within a certain time and if not paid, the appeal would stand dismissed without further formality. You know how it works, Pat. The amount was $15,000. Madge did not pay and so that is that. And has Madge paid Ian his costs in this one? Hell no!

    Enter Fake Prof J. Knox (a real dazzler known to his cousins and “Johnnykins” because, I understand, that this over 50 year old is seen as being a spoiled petulant little mummy’s boy). I like the name “Johnnykins” because only a Johnnykins could file the rubbish he has in Canada. Johnnykins was present in court along with Alair Shepherd when Goodridge J. read her decision to the Court. Yet, this fake professor, Johnnykins, subsequently swore in one of his interminable affidavits in Canada that he was not able to obtain details of this judgment of Goodridge J. The Deanes can keep him and welcome and I don’t think anyone can complain now of UWI terminating his employment – I am sure he provided abundant cause.


  15. David August 31, 2008 at 7:30 AM #

    We have read the back and forth with interest and with all respect to the articulate BWWR one cannot help but feel sorry for the old lady. There is the image of David and Goliath which keeps appearing in our minds.

    Having made the admission we have to say that in a free market (democracy) people are within their right to exploit what the system gives them. The person being picked on is within their right to fight back. If Madge Cox made bad decisions then isn’t that how the cookie crumbles? We are attempting to be dispassionate in the argument but like we said there is something distasteful in an old woman availing herself of a process which appears she is doomed to lose given the odds.Given her age one can only assume that maybe her siblings maybe the ones driving the decisions here?


  16. BWWR August 31, 2008 at 9:00 AM #

    Not siblings, David, her children. Her surviving siblings are Vere (aged 91 and mentally incompetent, sadly) Erie (aged 89) and Keith (aged 84) Madge is 85. So, it is her children, Kathy Davis, John Knox and Janey Goddard and their backer, Peter Allard.

    I agree that it is unfortunate and unattractive. However, it is, regrettably, typical of Madge and of the way she raised her children to think that they were better, brighter and more qualified than anyone else. Most importantly that no matter what happened, they HAD to be right and everyone else wrong. I watched this while her children were growing up. No matter what they did, they could always run to Madge and be told that the other party, never them, was wrong. While it leads children to grow up with a strong sense of self-worth, it does little to prepare them for the interaction of the adult world.

    So, while the children are the motors, Madge herself is, in my view, the architect. Yet, she might still be able to salvage something. I believe that she can. But it will mean getting rid of (or curbing) Mr. Allard and sitting down with Mr. Cox and her family (those of them that are defendants) and working something out. I do NOT believe that she has the sense or humility to do that. So the matter will continue until she has lost everything. But, she does still have a choice, from what I can see and what I hear. Let us hope she chooses wisely.


  17. Waterboy August 31, 2008 at 9:43 AM #

    no name // August 30, 2008 at 8:12 am


    Your comments are too personal. Only takes away from the discussion, makes you lose credibility and shows that you are not who you try to make us believe you are.

    Again I suggest you leave out the personal attacks on peoples’ characters and stick to the facts and the truth.

    i.e. Please “address FACTS and document them” if you want to be taken seriously.
    no name, you are right on target here. In this last post BWWR really only offers a bunch of petulant personal attacks and name calling.


  18. BWWR August 31, 2008 at 12:17 PM #

    You got to laugh. I write defending Peter Simmons from the misrepresentations of Keltruth, BFP and its minions and scurrilous attacks against him personally and I am named by no name and anoymous and the rest as being Peter Simmons.

    I write defending certain aspects of the Chief Justice’s conduct and criminally libellous statements and personal attacks by BFP and Keltruth and minions and I am “outed” as the CJ by the above. When I write defending Mr. Cox and Classic from indefensible and groundless attacks by the above, I am outed as being Mr. Cox. I write defending my country from the most disgusting attacks that are designed to reduce our status internationally and to hold us as a country and people up to ridicule and, according to the same above, I am Ian Deane.

    However, when I turn the tables on Keltruth and BFP and play them at their own game, despite the fact that, unlike them, I provide support evidence that IS admissible in a court of law, it is held by Waterboy and No Name that my attacks, which mirror those they and their cronies have launched, are not appropriate.

    Well, I will continue to attack just the way I always have and you Waterboy and you No Name – can go to hell.


  19. Bush tea August 31, 2008 at 2:06 PM #


    Don’t get tied up. There is a big difference between what is LEGAL and what constitutes JUSTICE.

    BWWR (or more correctly BWWW – who WRITES) is highly focused on what is legal. Furthermore this PR specialist keeps referring to court cases that seem to have nothing to do with the central issue.

    If I have enough money and time I can sue anyone for anything. If that person is unable, unwilling or unprepared to deal with the expensive and technical legal response – or is uninitiated in the legal requirements, or gets caught in the legal insider manipulations that characterizes Barbados, THEY WILL LOSE – right or wrong.

    Who in their right mind could see such a situation as anything but a shame that needs to be addressed?

    The only good thing about all this is that there is a GOD above, and that the jokers who perpetrate such schemes will ALWAYS pay a thousand times for their deeds….

    …but in the meantime, it is a good test of a society to see where we stand morally…. and we seem to be failing badly.

    Bush tea ain’t worried about Classic, BWWR or even Madge…. I hope the price they WILL all ultimately pay will be bearable. I am much more worried about our national social conscience…


  20. no name August 31, 2008 at 2:17 PM #

    Thanks BWWR,

    but I am not going to Hell that easy.

    I’ll be around.


  21. Pat August 31, 2008 at 8:36 PM #

    @ BWWR

    Thanks for the info. I thought Colin was Ian’s Dad.

    Dont worry about who they think you are. Afterall, they said I was ‘you (BWWR)’, then they said I was BFP, then there was no way I could be a woman, that I had to be a man. So, what else is new.

    I wonder why “No Name” and “Waterboy” dont go over to BFP and ask them to lay off the name calling, the aspersions, the sensationalized rants and other denigrations they are throwing out at Barbados’ institutions and populace? What is the problem with “Waterboy” and “No Name”? I will tell you, if they did, it would not see the light of day on BFP.


    You are right, one does have sympathy for the old lady. If only for the fact that she is not as educated as we are. However, someone or some people are engouraging her to go on with these litigations. It is true she made some mis-steps but, imho, I blame her children for not advising her and helping her out. A woman who had finished school by 17 is not as educated as those young university grads she produced. Now this Allard, the Great White, is swallowing her whole for his own ends.

    If you look at the saga dispassionately, (notwithstanding the fact that Classic and Ian did nothing illegal) it really is a pity if she loses it all.


  22. no name August 31, 2008 at 10:04 PM #

    Is the man’s name Iain or Ian Deane?


  23. Anonymous August 31, 2008 at 11:22 PM #

    BWWR cud not be Iain Deane.

    Iain Deane got musee 3 or 4 passports an always goin let you know bout dem an dat he don have to live anywhey bout hey.

    Iain Deane would never waste he time worrying bout Barbados.

    I doubt he does even come back.


  24. Pat September 1, 2008 at 12:23 AM #


    I suspect Iain has three passports – Canadian, British and Barbadian. So what else is new? My parents had the same three.

    I also say, as long as I have a valid passport, money in my pocket and is not wanted by Interpol, I can go anywhere and it does not necessarily mean Bim.

    He visits Barbados and I suspect he was there earlier this year, in May maybe?


  25. Iain Deane September 1, 2008 at 1:39 AM #

    I hold only one passport and am a citizen of three countries. Barbados (birth), United Kingdom (mother) and Canada (naturalization). I have a 90 year old, frail father whose memory is not what it was and who lives in Barbados. I also have many friends and business interests in Barbados. Finally, I and/or the estate of my late uncle of which I am executor are parties to three unheard civil suits before the Barbados courts. The estate is also a landowner in Barbados, such land being vested in me a executor.

    Iain Deane


  26. Keltruth Corp. September 1, 2008 at 8:25 AM #

    Mrs. Knox DID indeed offer the same as Classic for the shares of the other shareholders. In fact, she offered MORE. But the directors fought valiantly, allegedly racking up millions in legal fees, to avoid receiving MORE for their shares. They preferred the LOWER price from Classic. The courts did not appear to find this suspicious. The Law is a funny thing!


  27. Keltruth Corp. September 1, 2008 at 8:38 AM #

    Iain Deane said: “The estate is also a landowner in Barbados, such land being vested in me a executor.”

    Yes, Iain, you are the executor. Mrs. Knox is a beneficiary who has not received what was willed to her by her brother.


  28. Iain Deane September 1, 2008 at 9:36 AM #

    As I have said before, there are many matters before the Courts to which I and the estate of my late uncle are parties and I would consider it extremely disrespectful to those Courts (by whose decisions and orders for costs etc. I fully intend to abide and honour) were I to discuss those matters or anything relating to them, except before those Courts.

    I am satisfied that it is not in any way disrespectful to those Courts for me to apprise my fellow readers of Barbados Underground (since the issue has been raised and does not relate to or impact on any pending or determined litigation) as to the amount of passports that I may or may not have and what citizenships I hold. I have also suggested the compelling reasons that make frequent trips by me to Barbados not only a necessity, but a great pleasure and I would also add that I have a sister, a nephew and great nephew who are resident in Barbados and for whom I have tremendous affection.

    That is all I have to say. That is all I intend to say.


  29. Anonymous September 1, 2008 at 10:26 AM #


    So how many times in the past 12 months have you actually visited your 90 year old frail father?


  30. Iain Deane September 1, 2008 at 10:35 AM #

    Anonymous, none of your damed business.


  31. Anon 3 September 1, 2008 at 10:54 AM #

    Mr. Deane, some people have no manners or broughtupsy at all and Anonymous clearly is one of these. In my view, your position is 100% correct and I respect it. I believe most people will agree on this. The fact that you have three citizenships is by no means unusual in Barbados. Many Bajans have moved away from Barbados to pursue their professions and taken out citizenships in the country they are working in. In my experience this does not mean that Barbados does not hold pride of place in their hearts. On the contrary. Usually, absence makes the heart grow fonder. It certainly did mine when I was away from Barbados working for all those years. Also, when you are working overseas, the requirements of that work can sometimes mean that you cannot always get back to Barbados as often as you would like. At one point, because of work, I didn’t manage to visit Barbados for over three years. But we Bajans always come home at some point – it is our little rock and, even when we are vexed with it, we still love it.


  32. Anonymous September 1, 2008 at 11:10 AM #

    Anon 3:
    “The fact that you have three citizenships is by no means unusual in Barbados.”

    But is it common for people to hold conversations with themselves?

    Anon 3 is clearly another Iain Deane alias.


  33. Pat September 1, 2008 at 11:44 PM #

    @ Iain Deane,

    I wonder why you responded. I was having such fun speaking for you.

    Funny, I have multiple passports. Depending on where I am going I decide which one or two to travel with. For instance, on a Bajan passport you dont need a visa for Egypt, while for Tanzania you pay only $25 for a visa. On my other passports, I would pay more, up to $100 for a visa. However, while travelling in some countries I always use a “first world” passport. Or, I use one to get in and another to come out.


  34. Iain Deane September 2, 2008 at 5:18 AM #

    I remember you from the Registry from my days in articles very well and with great fondness, Pat, the only bright spot in an otherwise dull and exceedingly dusty environment. And I have enjoyed your speaking for me, but cannot say whether I always agreed or not due to court reasons.

    As for making a comment, I sometimes do. Most recently, I felt that I could make a contribution to the travel agent issue. Travel (and by extension, passports) is a way of life in my profession. It has nothing to do with issues before the courts, which I cannot discuss, so I feel I have the right to blog on them. I was also somewhat surprised to discover that I had managed to slip in and out of Barbados undetected on so many occasions. Like you, I don’t do anonymous – well, neither does Anonymous, not very well anyway.

    I was equally surprised that any ex patriot Bajan, with family in Barbados, was required to submit a schedule of their visits to Barbados and reasons for same.

    There was a time that I held three passports and I used them like you. I recall that one Saturday back in 1992 I was asked to start filming on a theatrical ad for Inter Continental Hotels and would leave on location the following Tuesday – for Cairo, then Tokyo, then Sydney,next Aukland and an overnight flight to Argentina (where memories of the Falklands War were still green) and then on to Rio and from Rio to Paris, Amsetrdam and then back across the pond to Washington, ending up some weeks later with a severe case of jet lag and exhaustion in London.

    At the time, we needed visas for many of the locations – so my UK passport was sent to the Japanese, my Barbados passport to the Ozzies and my Canadian passport to the South Americans. Some one asked me why I would send the Barbados passport to the Ozzies as it was unlikely they would ever have heard of Barbados. I pointed out that this was not true, as we were in the habit of administering a beating to them at cricket at least once a year – and by the way, had the idiot never heard of Garfield Sobers.

    But that was when I was acting. These days I don’t do that any longer and in my field (businessman – with the emphasis on producing classical music events) I am unlikely to be faced with such stringent deadlines. So, I have only one passport and it contains details of my place of birth (Barbados) and my British patrial and citizenship status and, along with my Canadian Citizenship Card, I can go anywhere in the World. It also saves me quite a bit of money in passport renewal fees.

    Actually, it is better that way because, also in 1992, I did a guest spot in a American CBS Network series that was shot in Eilat in Israel and we travelled from London to Israel on El Al. Even then, the security restrictions before you could board the plane makes the post 9/11 precaustions look weak. What really disturbed Israeli security people was finding my three passports during their search and the only thing I had going for me was that they were all in the same name – seems that had I been a spy, they would have been in different names.

    It’s been great to talk to you, Pat. It would be fantastic to meet up after these 40 years again some time. When next you are in Bim, if you give my sister a call (she is the world-famous Deane that my counsins at Keltruth have written about) she will give you my e-mail address.

    Bet wishes,



  35. Pat September 2, 2008 at 3:00 PM #

    @ Iain

    It is a small world. I cant help laughing.

    We called all of you by your last names. Like Fitzwilliam, Serroa (who I found arrogant and rude) Haynes, etc., but I never linked you. Were you there when he (serroa) reported me to the Registrar because he wasted time downstairs and wanted to browbeat me to take his docouments moments to three o’clock? Just because I asked them to line up!

    How was I to know who was first in line with no line? hahaha! At the end of the day they all had to line up. This was after I dealt with W.O.O Haynes and Rochester from Nova Scotia.

    Did you realize that the two guys behind me used to give me hell because I made more than they? We got extra for our “A” levels then and they did not have any. lol

    I may be home in February next year. I will be in Jamaica for Christmas and an aunt who lives states side, whom I have not seen for a while may be going down. I will see.

    I had problems at Schirpol in 1986, with the Israelis. I had business with ESA at Nordydk (?) and in the departure lounge one of the dogs fell for me. lol. But it was quickly resolved. I think they smelled the herring I was smuggling in my hand bag.

    I travelled quite a bit with my jobs. I have had many as I was more of a ‘generalist’ and not a specialist. I was in London in 1996 meeting with DTI and at Ashton in the same year. But most of my business travels were in the USA.

    I could have worked on APEC, but I was getting tired and stressed and was not looking forward to those long flights! Now I am retired.

    I promise I will not speak for you again. I also understand why you cannot talk. I am a good reader and I picked up where you do go to Bim and was there recently. Some people when they read, see only what they want to see.

    You do have a good memory. I did leave home 40 years ago. I suppose you must have left at around the same time.

    It was nice meeting you again. I miss Colin Williams. He was one hell of a gentleman. Had his eyes on me ‘methinks’!

    Looking forward to talking to you in the future. I will give your sister a call when I go home. Or, I may even call her from here.

    Keep good. Chin Up.

    All the best,



  36. Iain Deane September 3, 2008 at 2:39 AM #

    Hi Pat,

    I was there at the same time as Michael Fitzwilliam and the other guy. As for Colin Williams, he and I were in articles together. Great guy.

    I did leave Barbados about 40 years ago, but I lived there again between 1993 and 2001. I expect that if I ever retire, then like most Bajans, it will be in Barbados. Like you I have lived all over. Only way to go.

    Please feel free to speak for me any time you want. I’ve really enjoyed it. And you certainly got the signs right. I was very impressed. I will e-mail sis and ask her to give you my e-mail and phone number.




  37. Pat September 3, 2008 at 1:19 PM #

    @ Iain,

    Thanks, you are too nice!



  38. Anonymous January 29, 2009 at 8:32 PM #

    @All… As some of you might be aware, I’ve been a little busy lately…

    But might I please present the concept of the Quantum Uncertainty Field.

    This was discovered by some very bright people some time ago. (QED, et al.) It can be argued that the unknowable “Knowledge Membrane” (or “Knowledge Space”) can actually be quite large.

    Or, perhaps put another way, there are some things which can simply *not* be known.

    The phenomenon of anonymous communications (speaking from personal experience from the BBS days in the mid 80s on) brings this truism up to the tangible level of our very world views.

    Or, in the “high-bandwidth”: Most of what you “hear” is probably lies.

    Deal with it. Manage.


  39. Chris Halsall January 29, 2009 at 8:34 PM #

    Ironic… (smile…)

    That Anonymous post above is mine. (Just in case the pedantic style wasn’t obvious…)


  40. Lizzie March 6, 2014 at 10:16 PM #

    In order to work 50 weeks a year, you’re going to have
    to work 30 weeks; in order to work 30 weeks, you’ll likely have to work
    10. Unfortunately Nora Ephron recently passed away, but
    she left us with some of our most endearing romantic comedies of all time
    — from “When Harry Met Sally” to “Sleepless in Seattle” and “You’ve got Mail. After you do all this, you are ready to start performing in front of people for money.


Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: